Thursday, June 25, 2015

P & C's Cream-Puff "Interviews" of CCSD Superintendent Finalists

T'he P & C can really pick 'em. Our latest education reporter has absolutely no background in education unless you count graduating from Ohio State University, but she does have great lib-cred with a background at Mother Jones, etc. 

You would expect such a liberal reporter to balk at canned interview questions with the three superintendent finalists for the Charleston County School District, but maybe she doesn't know enough to think of her own. Two of these so-called "interviews" have appeared this week, and the third is to follow. The candidates sound as though they're filling out a questionnaire.

It's not what Deanna Pan asks; it's what she doesn't ask. The school board seems to have written the questions, which are the same for all candidates. Bland, bland, bland.

The intent of the questions seems to be to elicit uniform comments--what has prepared you to head this school district; how would you make relations with the school board harmonious; how would you improve diversity; do you like school choice; how important is standardized testing (my paraphrasing here). Nothing provocative, all eliciting similar prepared answers. 

How about these questions:
  • In what ways could the district cut its administrative costs?
  • Should non-academic factors be used for selection to the Academic Magnet and its ilk?
  • How would your administration differ from that of the previous superintendent?
  • Do you believe a national curriculum such as Common Core will benefit the district?
  • Will you order a forensic audit of the district and throw open its books?
Claiming ignorance of the district is not a viable option. Why would any candidate not do her homework and sound that ignorant?

Then, there are some special questions for Herring: how does a year or two teaching in a private school classroom years ago prepare you to understand problems facing CCSD's teachers today? What did you learn from your handling of the punishment given to the student who disrespected your daughter and its consequent furor?

While it's pointless to review how these three were selected, you still must wonder why the district didn't skip all the fuss by promoting Herring in the first place. After all, that's what it did for Nancy McGinley. Now if Herring is selected, people will assume it was a foregone conclusion, and if she's not, the NAACP will be in full cry.

1 comment:

Tony Geinzer said...

I think with, let's put it nicely, the Charleston County Cookies & Cream Ice Cream Interviews for Superintendent playing longer than the end of 106 and Park, I think there is a strong current beyond the response reflex that either Charleston County has to do forensic audit, or the State or FBI have to do it on their own in Charleston's Stead. Charleston is handling theirs like the Milwaukee of the Southland with no realiziation or implications for the actions/inactions of a community, namely, the Conner Returncoming from Iowa and the Principal Card from the same principal the next Summer. If we are talking money, why can't we talk about adminstrators rightfully dismissed but hired on in the South Carolina Shores? It is a sham and an embarrassment and if Nike sponsored poor kids to Chapel Hill to get the Carolina Covenant solvent, it would be topical, but, it'd be topical enough to make a new world of yourself from yourself Conflict of Interestisms like we are in Sierra Leone and Diamonds.